Julian,
I didn't realize there were any known issues. Unless I'm mistaken,
the only "fix" that didn't get into -03 was a suggestion by you
to add an additional definition, and I was waiting from text from
you for that.
Also note that there were no changes made that were not discussed
on the list.
-brian
briank@xythos.com
On Monday, September 29, 2003, at 11:25 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Jim,
>
> my concern with the quota specification is that everytime we discuss
> is,
> Stefan, myself and others are raising concerns about semantics and
> complexity of the spec, even suggesting much easier approaches that
> should
> cover the use cases we've seen equally well (see thread starting with
> [1]).
>
> I'd say that the lack of progress is mainly caused by these concerns
> not
> being appropriately addressed. In particular as this is now a WebDAV
> working
> group activity, I'd like to see a
>
> - known-issues list (like it should be present for any working group
> draft)
> and
> - public discussion of changes *before* a new draft is submitted
>
> Right now the draft seems to be handled like a private submission with
> very
> limited visibility to the (interested parts of the) working group, and
> this
> is really a shame.
>
> Julian
>
> [1]
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/
> 0314.html>
>
> --
> <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
>> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jim Whitehead
>> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 10:48 PM
>> To: WebDAV
>> Cc: stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de; briank@xythos.com;
>> julian.reschke@gmx.de; luther.j@apple.com; Lisa Dusseault
>> Subject: Current status of the quota specification
>>
>>
>>
>> All,
>>
>> It seems that we're not making additional progress on the quota
>> specification.
>>
>> My recollection from talking to Lisa is that another version of the
>> specification is ready to be submitted as an Internet-Draft. Is
>> there belief
>> that we could start a WG last call on this draft once it was
>> issued, or are
>> there still outstanding issues (or do you need to read the next draft
>> to
>> determine this).
>>
>> I think we're very close to completion on this work, it just
>> needs a little
>> bit of additional work to bring it to completion.
>>
>> - Jim
>>
>
>
>